Learning to View Reading in Classrooms Differently

May 18, 2008 - later in the day

Dilemmas that Arise from Something Knew
How can teachers guide and prepare students for twenty-first literacy demands? Recently, a local teacher (David K.) told me that he was using wikis with students in order to address the challenge of “real world” technology and to provide opportunities for students to learn the collaborative nature of composing texts, particularly a wiki. One day a student complained that “someone deleted” the work she had posted and wondered why no one had discussed it with her (anonymous deletions are part of the nature of wikis). Furthermore, she wanted to know how the teacher was grading students and how he could tell who had contributed what to the collaborative text, the wiki. Implicitly, this student raised pedagogical questions that point to dilemmas that arise when teachers try something new, and these dilemmas lead to discomfort because the path is unknown—at least to that teacher.

Teachers may feel comfortable when assigning a text for students to read, quiz them the next day, and claim through assessment of the quiz whether or not students had read the text. Students may not challenge teachers in this scenario because the process is known and accepted as a normal of a class, and presumably has some educative value. The process is also predictable, dependable and, in some respects, demanded by the institution, although it is not necessarily of more value.

Proposing New Directions
I am proposing that teachers make more visible to students classroom expectations, purposes and intended outcomes of reading, interpreting and responding to assigned texts. The proposal I make represents ways of thinking that are different from the norm, and the proposal I offer has, or will have, consequences for how we view students as readers and writers—and there will be consequences that we have not anticipated. One of the goals of this project is to make warranted cases for what students need to participate and contribute to in an expanding and changing global view of texts, economies, etc. I plan to provide teachers (and students) with questions that will challenge the status quo of how reading, interpreting and responding to texts are taught and engage them in conversations about assigned texts and possibilities of developing practices that lead students to, for example, examine claims and proposed evidence or thematic speculations.

Learning to See Differently: An Example
The first Shakespeare class I experienced in college showed me how much I did not know about reading early English literature, but more importantly, the professor demonstrated ways of reading and interpreting texts that changed the way I approached a text. Through his insistence that we examine the layers of a text, e.g., the potential double entendres of words or phrases or sentences, we learned that there are at least three layers of a text: (1) the apparent denotation of a statement, or the surface meaning; (2) the interpretation by the reader(s); and (3) the implication of the statement, or what it suggests—whether about the action or meaning within the text or beyond. The professor pointed to sexual innuendos as examples of double entendres, although some were beyond apparent evidence, e.g., “abundance,” a bun dance. However, I never looked at words and sentences in the same way. One consequence was that I noticed potential sexual innuendos in texts, whether the writer meant them or not; however, I had noticed possibilities and I then had to learn to evaluate the probability or plausibility of that potential.

Logic of Inquiry: From NWP to Developing Similar Principles as Readers
The National Writing Project has developed a professional development model with three core principles: teachers of writing should write; teachers are the best teachers of teachers; and demonstration lesson should derive from classroom experiences. Since 1974 the NWP has worked to develop approaches to teaching writing, including encouraging teachers to guide students to link personal experiences with academic writing demands, and to make visible to students processes of writing. However, similar approaches to reading are much more difficult to pin to a general approach. Writing for many NWP teachers is based on experiences and qualitative research; writing is situated within particular contexts, dependent on genre and audience and the writer’s intent.

Reading, interpreting and responding to texts are distinct processes and occur simultaneously. For example, we may read a literary text in English left to right, top to bottom, interpret through a particular literary lens (or theory), and respond personally or interpersonally during the first two processes. However, how we read, interpret and respond, for what purposes, under what conditions, with what particular outcomes are not easily addressed and each suggests a question that teachers should make visible—something beyond “because I told you so.”

Works that are important for multiple perspectives
• Reason for particular frames, e.g., critical lens or feminist. Must point out what is missing; if don’t point to something missing, then why would people entertain different approaches?
• Example: Received knowledge is no longer adequate; must be able to examine possibilities, see that speakers speak from particular positions, purposes, etc.; readers read and interpret within particular contexts, including the interpretive lens, etc.
• Mellor and Patterson (in Beach et al., 2nd ed.) discuss why new approaches do not necessarily lead to change, although the approach does make visible the need for new language.
• Garth Boomer’s negotiated curriculum
• Brian Johnston: centered on the negotiated curriculum
• Bartholomae and Petrosky
• Joanne Golden: showing how different perspectives on a traditional story raises possibilities of seeing that story differently
• Carol Dixon and DRTA
• Green, Baker & Yeager: negotiating: with self, in public space, etc.